THE LAND "DUMMYING" CASES.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XX, Issue 2365, 1 March 1893, Page 2

THE LAND "DUMMYING" CASES.

ACCUSED BEFOEE THE COUET AT NEW PLYMOUTH.

(BY OUR SPECIAL KEPORTER.)

On Tuesday, at the E.M. Court, New Plymouth, before W. Stuart, Esq., E.M., and C. E. Stock, Esq., J.P., tbe informations charging the making of false declarations under the Land Act were taken. The first case was that of Eichard Owen Hendy, against whom tbe information averred that he bad, when applying for certain land, made a false declaration on 12th July, in having declared that he was not the holder, tenant, or occupier, directly or indireotly, of more than 640 acres of first class land, or 2000 acres of second class land, including the land mentioned in bis application — viz., section 5, block 4, Hawera Survey District, containing 720 acres. Mr Eoy appeared for tbe prosecution ; Mr Samuel for the defendant ; and all witnesses were ordered out of court. Mr Samuel contended that this included Mr C. OH. Smith, the informant, but, after argument, The Court overruled tbe objection, unless Mr Samuel could show some authority for departing from ordinary practice. p Mr Samuel, however, demanded as a right upon tbe authorities that Mr Smith must retire, and that be should not b» permitted to remain in court to " patch up " the case. " All " witnesses had been ordered out, and all must go. Mr Eoy said Mr Smith was necessary to instruct him. Bather warm passages at arms occurred, until the Bench said that there was no need for counsel to " go for " one another. Ultimately, however, the Bench ordered Mr Smith to withdraw. Tbe case was then opened as that defendant had made a false statutory declaration in stating that, at the time of making the declaration, he was not tbe ownef , occupier, or tenant of more than 640 acres of first class, or 2000 acres of second class land, whereas it would be proved that he was owner of more than 2000 acres. Mr Samuel— Owner ? Mr Eoy — Owner, tenant, or ooeupier. Sidney Weetman, Commissioner of Crown Lands, Taranaki, was tbe first witness ; and he gave formal evidence as to the gazetting of tbe land. To Mr. Samuel — I have been a Commissioner of Crown Lands since May,

1889. During that time have you known several different forms printed for the purpose of making application for land on deferred payment, perpetual lease, and oash ?— I cannot say " several " ; there have been one or two.

One or two of each ? — I cannot say one or two ot each. You have known one or two different forms ? — I know of tbe ordinary forms, one for perpetual lease, one for deferred payment, one for cash. Not more than one form for each ?—? — There was one form withdrawn ; that was a sort ot alternative. These forms had remained in use until those under the new Act came into operation. Has there also been issued and given to officers for circulation to the public, one form framed so as to apply to all three modes of application — all three systems, with alterations to Buit each case ?— Yes ; there was one. Did that contain only one clause referring to tbe land which the applicant possessed, held, or owned ? — I cannot say. Can you get that form ? — We have soixe. They were recalled shortly after issue. They were issued freely to the public while in possession of the department ? — So far as I am aware. Argument ensued as to the necessity for going into this, but counsel for the defence said that as the whole question was one of wilfulnesß the matter waß most impoitant. Do you remember some difficulty as to construing tbe law with regard to tbe limit of land that a man might have when applying for land on perpetual lease ?—? — No ; not on perpetual lease. Are you aware of any reference made to tbe law officers of the Government on the subject ? — Yes. Mr. Eoy objected to a legal opinion from the Solicitor- General being obtained from tbe witness. Mr. Samuel said the witness was an administrator of the law giving evidence as to what had officially taken place. It was dear from these objections that this was not a prosecution, but a persecution. If tbe aotion was taken in tbe interests of justice, why should not the opinion of the Solicitor-General be made known ? The matter was publicly before the land board at tbe time. Question allowed. Witness said he bad reoeivedan opinion from the Secretary of Crown Lands, but he did not know whether it came from the Solicitor- General. It was received before be came to Taranaki, and was in reply to a communication from bis predecessor, Mr. Humphries. Tbe memorandum was as follows : •■ Wellington, 28rd November, 1889. In reply to your memo., number 1195, of che 12tb November, re area to be selected on d,p., I am directed to inform you that as it was found that tbe Act of 1887 conflicted with that of 1885, olause 11 of the Act of 1888 was specially inserted to put the matter right. The limits of selection are, under the present laws: oash lands 640 acres first-class, and 2000 acres second c'ass ; d.p. 640 acres only ; p.l. 640 aores first, and 2000 seoond- class, as noted in all the posters now issued." This opinion was given after the Amending Act of 1888 bad cured tbe contradictions between the Aote of 1885 and 1887. Previous to 1889 the Land Board was in doubt as to how much land a person might own or bold and yet apply for land on various systems. Witness was asked if he had seen any written report from Mr. Smith to a superior officer on tht subject uf this prosecution ? —Yes. What was the purport of it ? Mr. Eoy objected. The Bench considered that they had no right to permit communications between Mr. Smith and superior officials. Mr. Eoy said the objection was based on privilege. Mr. Samuel said a solicitor could not claim privilege. Did tbe witness claim .it?

Witness — Yes, I do. Mr, Samuel — I suppose so, after Mr. Eov's remark. Examination continued — I do not know of applications and declarations in my office from persons applying for over 640 acres which nevertheless contain the statement that with what they are applying for they have not 640 acres. lam not aware that a man oan for cash apply for 640 aores of first class-land and 2000 acres of second-class land in each land district in the colony. (Forms of application in •cash,, deferred payment, and perpetual lease in use iuioi' to 1890 put in.) — Look at the . applicant n tor rural land or cash, is it not so f — Yes. There are nine land districts in the colony. Then supposing he held these areas of land in each of eight districts be oan still under that form of declaration apply for 2640 aores more in the nioth district ?— Yen. The form lor perpetnal lease and deferred payment as to area was different. To Mr. Boy — The 720 aores applied for by defendant was second-class land. W. Hey wood Tri« ble, obief olerk in Land Department, New Plymouth, pro-

duced application and declaration signed by defendant, dated 12th Jaly, 1890,, 1n respect of section 5, block 4, Hawera Survey District, being application for rural land on perpetual lease. Believed it was banded to him by defendant on 16th July. Hendy was not successful. J. W. F. Jones was the successful apphoant. To Mr Samuel— l produce form of application which may be used for applying for land on either of tbe three systems, d.p,, p.1., and cash. It was supplied to office for Dublic circulation, and was circulated, bat I do not know for bow long. It undoubtedly was circulated for several months. According to the form one declaration as to area applies to all three systems. It appears to show that he may apply for, make declaration for 640 aores of first class land and 2000 aores of second class. The three forms produced by Mr. i Weetman were sent for circulation some months afterwards instead of tbe other

form, which had not since been used except for cash transactions. Large numbers of this alternative form were in circulation throughout the Taranaki district. At the time Mr. Hendy banded me this declaration he handed in three others. All four were alike except as to section and area ; all four were unsuccessful. Eaob has written on it,

11 Should I have this section allotted to me I withdraw my other application." I do not recollect any conversation with Mr. Hendy about land adjoining his property. If such applications had been sent in daring the laßt twelve montbß I would not have accepted them. It is diffioult at this length of time to recollect what was the procedure then. There was no doubt in my mind then as to what the law provided for in tbe way of area, but there was general. ignorance in the public mind. I have in my office reoords of all tbe lands held by persons under p.l. and d.p., and of all persons who have acquired land from the Crown. Witness was examined at length as to

differences of requirements in respect of p.l. and d.p. declarations, and stated that there was a great difference, so that a man might be able to take up land on d.p. system though he could not do so on

p.l. system. Could not say whether people generally knew of this. Eemembered only one ; that was a person wbo had reminded him of it. Always requested people to read over their papers carefully ; it was very likely that many people would think She declarations were similar, bat he bad no knowledge of that. Had never heard of any pablio discussion of the difference.

Mr. Samuel wished to put questions to discover whether the witness thought there was any immorality in taking up more land under d.p. than under p.]., or as much under p.l. and d.p. as for cash ; but tbe court ruled tbe questions irrelevant.

To Mr. Eoy— The alternative form was circulated for three or four months.

William Alfred Parkinson gave evidence in identification of the signatnre of J. C. Yorke, before whom one of the declarations was made.

Alfred Trimble also identified the signature of Mr. Yorke ; and that of Mr. Hendy on application and declaration.

Thomas George Waitt, olerk in Land Office, having charge of books and documents connected with alienation of land, stated ; I know Mr. Hendy ; be is licensee of tbe Crown in respeot of deferred payment sec. 25, block x., Ngaire, 253 acres of first cIaES land. Tbe license is dated 6th of January, 1890, and he was bolder of it on 12th July, 1890; he is still tbe bolder ; be makes bis pay* ments half-yearly at Hawera ; be also holds a perpetual lease seotion, No. 7, Block IV., Hawera, 630 acres ; tbe lease is dated 10th May, 1890, and runs for 30 years from July, 1890 ; it is second-class land ; the lease is signed by Mr. Hendy ; it is still in tbe hands of Mr. Hendy ; he holds no other land from the Crown in my department. To Mr. Samuel : AH the land of the Crown held by Mr. Hendy on 12tb July f 1890, consisted of 883 acres in all. Mr.

Hendy does not hold or own, nor has be ever held or owned, the land mentioned in the four declarations before tbe court. They are all tteld by other persons. Eeginald Bayley, assistant land registrar at New Plymouth, prodnoed certified

copy of lease from Pablio Trustee of land in tbe Waimate Survey Distriot for term

of 21 years, from July, 1883 — seotion 142, block IV., Waimate Survey District, con-

tainiog 156 acres; seotion 144, same

block, 80 acres ; section 145, 80 aores ; in all, 316 acres. Also produced certified copy of certificate of title in tbe name of Eichard Owen Hendy, of section 51, block VIII., Waimate, containing 60 acres. He is still owner of that. Also certified copy of certificate of title in the name of E. O. Hendy of section 60, block VIII., Waimate, 60 aores; dated 16th December, 1886, and be still held that land. Also certified copy of certificate of title m favor of Frederick Lowiok, showing memorial of transfer from Lowick to W. C. Eaikes and from Eaikes to Hendy of sec. 58, block 4, Waimate Survey District, containing 50 aores.

Cross-examined— The Pablic Trustee's lease, 816 aores, was sub-leased to Lomax in 1889 ; so far as I know tbe sub-lease is still in existenoe ; Ido not know whether the sab-lease is for tbe whole of tbe term or not ; sec. 51 is subject to a lease, registered 6th Marob, 1889, to John Muir, whioh, so far as I know, is still in existence ; sec 50 is also subject to the same lease to John Muir ; sec 58 is subjeot to a lease to James Lomaij registered 25th March 1889. All these properties are under lease to other persons. The farther bearing of the case was adjourned till 10.30 next day.